New Ulm weekly review. [volume] (New Ulm, Minn.) 1878-1892, 1887-02-16
Wednesday, Feb. Is, 1887.

In recent decision rendered in favor
OF the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul
Railway Company, appellant, against
the State Of Minnesota, the supreme
court unanimously declares the grain
and warehouse law unconstitutional.
The court holds that ''the lands ac-
quired by q railroad company for the
purposes of its enterprise are, so far as
the right of property is concerned, pri-
vate property. If purchased, the com.
pany pays for them; if taken in the ex-
ercise Of the right Of eminent domain,
it pays the compensation to the owner.
They are purchased or taken and held
for public purpose, a public use. 9th
erwise they could not be taken under
the right Of eminent domain. They are
charged with a public duty, which the
company, in consideration of the rights
and powers conferred on it by the state,
assumes to perform, and which the
state can compel it to perform. But
such pnblic use is specific, not general,
and when required for any other public
use the land must be taken for the pur-
pose in the same manner as the lands
Of any private owner are taken. e.,
through the right Of eminent domain.
The ownership being private, there be-
ing private interest in them, they can
not in any manner or any pretext be
taken for a private use without the con-
sent of the owner. Nor can they be
taken for public use without making
just compensation. 1t is conceded
that, if the action authorizes a ''taking"
within the constitutional meaning of the
term, the section of the law in ques-
ton cannot be sustained. And this is
undeniable, for the act makes no pro-
vision for ascertaining or making 'just
compensation rs required by the con-
stitution . 1t is, however, commended
that the section aims merely at regulat-
ing the public use for which the land
was originally taken. BY that taking
the company acquired and paid for the
exclusive right to possess and employ
the land in that public use. Such right
cannot be taken from it, except through
exercise of the right of eminent domain
or through forfeiture. The section
does not assume to control or direct
the company in its use of the land, but
to exclude it from such use, and to con.
fer the right to employ it in similar
use upon another. 1t must be apparent
that the amount of land to. be taken
does not affect the principle. SO far
as the section requires railway compa-
MES to let other persons in possession
Of any portion of their land without the
compensation required by the constitu-
ton, it is invalid The foregoing de-
cision clearly defines the relation of the
state to the private property of railway
corporations. The state can take any
amount of private property for public
use by exercising its right of eminent
domain; but according to the constitu.
ton Of the UnitedStates, this right cannot
be exercised without rendering :.just
compensation and our State constitu-
ton brings out this point even more de-
fnitely by saying that private property
shall not be taken for public use with.
out just compensation therefor, first
paid and secured" Railway corpora
lions are exercising functions properly
belonging to the government.So long as
the government leaves the performance
of certain portion Of it's duties to pri-
Vate enterprise,it is certainly justified IN
placing this work under such regula-
tons and restrictions as may best SUBJ
serve the public good. But the power
OF government ends here. It cannot
regulate any private property, or SER
vices equivalent to an assignable
amount Of property, out of any individ-
ual or corporation without just COM
pensation therefor" Mr.. Gregory and
other members Of our legislature who
have advocated such nonsense as COM
pe91ing the railroads to carry legislators
and other public luminaries free of
charge, ought to study the fundamen-
tai principles of our republican govern
ment before making any further at
tempts at encumbering our statute
books with laws that will be wiped out
by the courts. The suggestion that
such extortion is form Of taxation is
too absurd to require refutation. High
Way-robbery cannot be justified on any
such pretense as that If our legisla-
: r = ag,F. & -